Who says either of these things? Chomsky says producing and acquiring theory "can be hard work." The fact that the smart ideas are simple doesn't mean they are easy to come by or absorb. Likewise, having simple theories doesn't mean explanations of reality will be simple. Simplicity and clear explanation are not necessarily coterminous. Take Herman and Chomsky's theory of the commercial media, for instance. The theory is simple and clear, yet the explanation of the institutions it highlights is quite complicated.
It's interesting to hear your thoughts on this topic, which I find pretty surprising. I perceive your own work as being a model of clarity and maximal simplicity, with minimal theoretical mumbo-jumbo interference. (Isn't all science an effort at rational simplification?) Reading you, I'd have thought you'd be likely to heartily endorse Chomsky's view of theory. It's obvious you bust your butt to come up with your results and that what you do requires serious expertise about arcane processes, but I have never sensed that you feel much indebted to Big Theory. What am I missing?